To cage the beast….
So now I have discussed various rogue man-killing and man-eating animals and the efforts taken to either destroy them or to prevent people from coming in contact with them in the first place. These days, where conservation is much more of a thing than in the past, the latter method of protecting people is first made use of, and the former only as a last resort. Any shark traveling anywhere close to a beach popular with vacationers would have been caught and killed without exception. As was the case for decades after the original “Jaws” incident. Tigers were likewise not so endangered in the 19th century, and therefore no effort was taken to try preserve the life of a man-eater. Avoidance and awareness is one of the main ways in which people and dangerous animals can be safely separated. However, in some countries, waters close to the popular beaches are netted to protect swimmers in areas with high concentrations of dangerous sharks. But for any large predatory animal, it is only acting upon its nature, which has been honed over millions of years. And at times, that predatory acumen is turned against humans. This doesn’t touch on animals that might attack humans for other reasons, like bears defending their cubs. Again, avoidance is the preferred defense, and then non-lethal deterrents like bear spray if needed and reserving lethal means as a last resort. Along with trying to understand the animal’s behavior and then attempt to avoid that which may trigger either a predatory or defensive attack.
But what happens when a repetitive killer isn’t an animal, nor another human, but rather something man-made? What measures might be taken to curb killings in those circumstances? In the past (19th and well into the 20th century) such deaths were often ignored, perhaps in the hopes that they would simply cease to happen. Also in those days local African tribes might consider a man-eating lion not as a flesh and blood beast, but rather the angry spirit of a deceased shaman. The idea of trying to hunt it down and kill it was foreign to them due to their belief system. And so they either dealt with losing tribe members here and there, or they migrated to another area to try and escape the “curse”.
Surprisingly these days, there are indeed killers among us that are not necessarily cloaked in superstition but rather in willful ignorance. Those African tribes likely had taboos regarding vengeful ancestors, and even to this day there are still taboos in force when it comes to dealing with these man-made monsters.
However, that seems to be changing somewhat, especially in light of instances where the outcry becomes too great and the killer can no longer be ignored. Victims of rogue beasts could never get their loved ones back, but they could raise their voices and demand that action be taken so that no one else suffers the same sort of loss. The taboo is still present, although there are efforts afoot to try and break it down as well. In recent days I’ve come upon some news articles concerning such efforts to reign in several man-made lethal monsters. Unlike lions and tigers of yore, such menaces cannot simply be destroyed. This is because like apex predators, these entities have a very vital role to play in daily life, especially in the lives of all those who make use of them. If there were no tigers left, the ecosystems in which they inhabit would very quickly come out of whack, just as in Yellowstone park once the wolves were exterminated. This effect has been well documented at that famous national park. A different type of deleterious effect is also being documented in here Baltimore, with the loss of the Francis Scott Key Bridge. This loss has resulted in all sorts of traffic and congestion problems across the entire area, as well as negative impacts on nearby homes and businesses. So while large predators (and large bridges) sometimes spell death for certain people, their benefits far outweigh these problems. The only exception to that general rule is when the killings become excessive, and are linked to a specific beast. A tigress that has killed over 400 people was surely excessive and had to be stopped, as was a certain San Francisco bridge that has oversaw the demise of over 2000 people. But there are also lesser known repeat killers that are finally being bound and chained.
Measures to address these issues often take a while to come to fruition, mostly due to cost. To track and kill (or capture) a man-eating animal takes skill and experience, for which compensation must be paid. Even the most legendary big game hunters employed several gun bearers, trackers and other help to aid in their quests. And hunts often took weeks, or even months, before the bloodthirsty beast could finally be tracked down and killed. For non-living killers, finances must also be put in place, and engineering studies must be done to avoid causing structural damage. And this doesn’t even include all sorts of bureaucratic red tape. Then the cage must be built. And indeed this process has taken many years, especially for the iconic orange bridge that has far exceeded the death toll of that notorious tigress. But there are some minor drawbacks if the beast is not slain. Some people will still die, though not nearly as many as before the beast was caged. Thus the chained beast continues to exist and fulfill its main purpose in life, as might most people who would have likely been its victims (assuming they aren’t lured to their demise in other ways, which is entirely possible and even likely).
Here are two examples of metal and concrete monsters that are to be caged:
The first of those two is a little known localized killer with comparatively few victims to its name. But clearly there were enough deaths to warrant an attempt to render this monster far less lethal. The second is a legendary killer that has been on the rampage for a very long time. This one fascinates me because it is so ordinary. Perhaps this is not unlike the fascination some people had, or have, with serial killer Ted Bundy. He was clean cut and inoffensive looking, and did not “look like” a serial killer. Bundy was able to get his victims to approach him for this very reason. He did not look dangerous…and neither does the Coronado Bridge (unless of course one is afraid of heights). The former killed dozens, while the latter has overseen the deaths of more than 500 victims, exceeding the body count of that notorious tigress. The Coronado Bridge is nothing more than a drab, ordinary looking concrete and steel girder bridge. However, it is fairly tall at 200 feet of shipping clearance above the water, so that may be part of the reason this unassuming bridge has been able to host such a long-running self inflicted massacre. However, upon doing a photo search, it seems to have been (or is) lit up at night very much like that other ultra deadly monster, the Sunshine Skyway. This is perhaps a subject best left to a future entry – why make such deadly structures even more conspicuous? Outside of safety lighting for motorists and marine traffic, a horrible, blood splattered metal and concrete monster should really remain in darkness at night. But either way, the Ted Bundy of bridges, and that far lesser known killer of the northeast will soon be bound and chained, unable to allow harm to come to most would-be victims.
Actually, if such bridges can be conflated with human serial killers, perhaps a better example is Charles Manson. An insanely evil person, Manson nonetheless never laid a hand on a single one of his victims. Instead he had his lackeys do the dirty work for him. No bridge has ever done anything to actively kill someone (outside of one that collapses with people on it or under it); rather, it is the victim who undertakes and completes the actions necessary to ensure death. So, unlike Manson, the killer bridge is incapable of hunting down and slaying its victims. Instead, it invites them to approach. And, just like a human serial killer, there is a sought out type, and it is those particular victims who will respond to the deadly invitation.
I am not going to get into exactly what that invitation might entail, as there is really no easy way to garner such information. The dead do not talk; and survivors’ accounts often do not go into such deep detail. Therefore, I can only speculate and I don’t think there really is a standard answer to be found. That said, there is but one thing I cannot help wonder. Will the new incarnation of the Key Bridge be built in such a way as to address its predecessor’s association with death? As of now, it is unlikely, but still officially on the table, as to whether it will include a bike and pedestrian walkway. If such a thing becomes part of the new bridge, it is pretty much a guarantee that this new monster will be chained from the very start. But, if the more likely option of the Key Bridge being only a freeway crossing is taken, then all bets are off as to whether its creators will make any attempt to stop it from turning into a killer. It has already been stated that the next version of the Bay Bridge will include such measures, because it is expected that one of its spans will have pedestrian access. There has been talk of making the new Key Bridge safer for motorists, by adding shoulders and raising the height of the side rails. But in so far as to those who would heed the call and surmount those rails, no one knows for sure. The state does have a social media site set up for updates and questions about Baltimore’s upcoming monster, but there’s no way I could ask such a question. They might find it to be quite a weird and ghoulish query, as of course even talking about such things is still taboo for the most part. Perhaps a few others might also be curious, like the Key Bridge jumper’s family and loved ones. I suppose the state transportation authority might be willing and able to answer any such questions, if anyone has the nerve to ask. But it isn’t going to be me! Instead, I’ll just wait and see.